Ursodeoxycholic acid for treatment of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: Results of a randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No effective medical therapy is available for all patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) has been suggested to be of benefit based on open label clinical studies. We randomized 166 patients with liver biopsy-proven NASH to receive between 13 and 15 mg/kg/d of UDCA or placebo for 2 years. End points included changes in liver test results and liver histology at 2 years of therapy. The treatment groups were comparable at entry with regard to age, gender, risk factors for NASH, serum liver biochemistries, and baseline liver histology. A total of 126 patients completed 2 years of therapy. Pre- and posttreatment liver biopsies were available in 107 patients for review at the end of the study. UDCA was well tolerated and body weight was stable during the study duration. Serum liver biochemistries were stable or improved in both the UDCA and placebo-treated groups. Changes in the degree of steatosis, necroinflammation, or fibrosis that occurred with therapy were not significantly different between the UDCA and placebo groups. In conclusion, 2 years of therapy with UDCA at a dose of 13 to 15 mg/kg/d, although safe and well tolerated, is not better than placebo for patients with NASH.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".